UNION OF INDIA Vs. SHIV SHARAN RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Central Provident Commissioner has filed this writ petition being aggrieved by the order dated 13.02.2012 passed in OA No. 71 of 2011, as filed by the sole contesting respondent.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner-Central Provident Fund Commissioner and learned counsel for the employee and perused the records.

(3.) The applicant, before the Tribunal and respondent herein, was an employee of the Provident Fund Department and was apparently compulsorily retired with effect from 05.08.2003. He had preferred his statutory remedies and then come to the Tribunal challenging his compulsory retirement in OA No. 317 of 2005. This OA was finally heard and disposed of on 21.07.2008 and the Tribunal, inter alia, held that the applicant be treated to be in service till his superannuation. Thereby, the order of compulsory retirement was set aside. Having said so, the Tribunal quantified the relief by stating that as petitioner had in fact not worked from 05.08.2003 to the date of his superannuation on 30.06.2008, he would be entitled only of the 75% of the remuneration. Directions were given to clear the retiral dues accordingly and if there was any delay, interests were to be paid. The applicant then filed the present OA 71 of 2011. pointing out that in spite of the Tribunal 's order, he had not been granted full leave encashment, Productivity Linked Bonus (for brevity, PL Bonus) and interest on the delayed payments. The Tribunal noted that the order passed by it in the earlier proceedings, having attained finality, it had to be deemed that the applicant was in service right from 05.08.2003 till his superannuation on 30.06.2008. Once that is there, then he would be deemed to be a full fledged employee in that period and from that, it would follow that he would be entitled to all other benefits as a regular employee including leave encashment and PL Bonus. This is what the Commissioner is aggrieved by.